[refpolicy] state of core/contrib split

Dominick Grift dominick.grift at gmail.com
Thu Sep 6 13:03:08 CDT 2012

On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 19:15 +0200, Guido Trentalancia wrote:
> On 06/09/2012 19:01, Christopher J. PeBenito wrote:
> > The core/contrib split in the refpolicy repo has been around for a year.  Unfortunately, I don't think it has gone as originally planned, as the people with commit access haven't really been committing anything.  Differences between refpolicy and distro policies are pretty severe in some cases.  What can we do to improve the situation?
> In my opinion, file contexts are probably impossible (or at least 
> extremely expensive) to tackle in a one-fits-all way for all possible 
> distributions and at the same time they are sort of silly blockers.
> > Additionally, due to his many contributions to the policy and reviewing of others' patches, Dominick Grift has been given contrib commit access.
> >

I just made my first commit which was a trivial one and symbolic.
Porting some of the fedora policy is harder than one might think. One
issue is that it may require changes to refpolicy (not contrib) others
have to do with how fedora deals with certain issues ( which are
probably not acceptable by refpolicy )

One thing Fedora could do in my opinion is when it makes commits to its
own git repository, take some time to see if this commit applies or is
easily applied to contrib/refpolicy.

That probably means keeping a local refpolicy/contrib policy and port
the commits to that and then either submit the patches to this list or
commit to refpolicy/contrib them selves.

That requires extra work no doubt but maybe Miroslav and his employer
are willing to take that extra effort in order to make the changes not
bigger than they already are.

Some changes refpolicy should not want as it sets a bad precedent IMHO.
I have seen this.

The last week i have been trying to write a systemd policy on top of
refpolicy on a minimal fedora 18 system and i encountered issue that i
would not have if i would write my systemd policy on to of fedora

This is due to some coarse rules added to fedora that hide/obscure some
important issues that ideally need to be confronted head on.

For example: dealing with inheriting and fd

In the refpolicy we have the opportunity to not go the same route as
fedora. (In some regard refpolicy also went astray in my opinion
though , for example i suspect refpolicy made/makes domains unconfined
to easily) That means that some changes, and their dependencies,
downstream just cant apply to refpolicy.

So its a tough situation that we probably only can resolve together i
suspect. It requires that we agree on standards/rules and share the same
values. Prefer quality over quantity, but i guess its also give and take
on both sides of the isle.

Some frank and open communication can go a long way, but i understand
for many its a paid job with dead lines and stuff.

So its not easy.

I will do what i can to merge as much to contrib as i can as long as i
can. I don't deal with employers and deadlines so much but i have my
share of uncertainty that i have to deal with in my life.

I like the split of refpolicy and contrib. unfortunately refpolicy does
not build without contrib though due to optional policy i guess.

It is also unfortunate that eclipse-slide is no longer in active
development. This application really make life much easier and
productive for policy writers

> _______________________________________________
> refpolicy mailing list
> refpolicy at oss.tresys.com
> http://oss.tresys.com/mailman/listinfo/refpolicy

More information about the refpolicy mailing list